Thread: Maven RS1.2 2.5-15x44 FFP review

So my new Maven scope arrived this week, and a number of the lads have asked me for a review, so here you go!

Mounted to my Tikka .223. The eye relief is good and long, so it mounts quite far forward. That’s a good thing in my book.


Has an exposed elevation turret, with the windage capped. Both a tool less resettable. The elevation has a solid pin-on-pin zero stop, which just works. Turret clicks are very similar to my Nightforce, with maybe a little less effort required to adjust. No concern to me though, turrets are good.



As seen in the photos, it’s parallax adjustable from 10yds to infinity and marked. The adjustment is relatively stiff, but not unusable. Probably about right as it will prevent inadvertent movement when hunting.

The scope weighs 26oz, which puts it in the weight ball park of most robust 30mm scopes. Lovers of Swaro’s probably want to look elsewhere, but personally I like the confidence that a robust sighting system gives me. These Mavens have been given an objective thrashing by various users overseas, and have come out the other side of testing with results like that of Nightforce. It’s a bit of a long sucker too, but that doesn’t worry me either.

So, the important bit- the reticle. This model has a MIL-SHR reticle that (in my opinion) is very good. The outer stadia are thick enough at 2.5x to be useable (looks like a standard duplex) and the MIL hash marks become useable from about 4x.
I found zeroing very quick being able to measure shot offset from zero with the reticle, and be able to immediately adjust to centre-punch the bull on following shots. From bore sight to a confirmed 10 round zero in 18 shots. 3 at 25, 5 round group at 100- adjusted .2 mil down and then a 10 shot group on zero.

Reticle at 4x at 100m:


8x - the setting that I zeroed at. The centre dot was great for accuracy work.


15x

What’s the retail $ on these ?

Good review - nice looking scope

Continued…..

The reticle was very useable, and it’s the best FFP reticle I have looked at to date.

I also set up two dots vertically on the target measured at 3MIL apart. These checked out at 3MIL on the reticle. I them fired 3 shots at the bottom dot, adjusted up 3MIL and put another 3 shots through. Based on that quick test, the turrets dialled the correct adjustment.



Summary:
I really like this scope, and am stoked I managed to secure two of them while I could. For me, a scope is a sighting device, so primarily has to be reliable (hold zero) and adjust consistently and accurately. Based on other user tests and my limited time with this scope, it will tick all these boxes.
Everything in life is a compromise, and a bit of weight is what I’m giving up here. But, in comparison I’m picking up a heap of capability- wind holds that are accurate no matter the scope magnification and the ability to use ‘quick drop’ for the two rifles that these will live on.
I’ve also bought two for slightly less coin than one NX8 would have cost me…
So that brings me to the ‘glass’ - something that the euro scope fans tend to lean on. Basically this scope was fine. I don’t prioritise that quality that highly really, so can’t comment much more. They’re made in the LOW factory so the optics are good, and that’s about all I can say here. The thing worked, and didn’t give me an ‘oh shit’ feeling either way when I first looked through it. Probably at least as good as my NXS Nightforce.

The illumination is useable, but not as good as the digilum I’m used to. It is adjustable in intensity from 1-10 via rotary dial. I haven’t ever used illumination in anger yet, so not a a deal breaker for me. At 2.5x it appears like a red dot, so would be fine for any close range low light shooting.

To sum up, if the Aussie dealers had any more in stock, I’d be selling the 2.5-10 NXS and getting one more. Primarily, because I’m now a total convert to First focal plane scopes, and this one does everything I’ll need it to.

Originally Posted by chainsaw

What’s the retail $ on these ?

This one cost me $2300 landed in NZ. Second one will be a bit more as customs are sending me a bill for import tax and duty….

Got it from Josh at The Modern Hunter Aus & NZ. Good guy to deal with
https://themodernhunter.com.au/

Someone has been sipping, no, guzzling, the Rokslide cool aid...

Originally Posted by caberslash

Someone has been sipping, no, guzzling, the Rokslide cool aid...

Haha yeah guilty. I’ve learned a heap of good stuff from there though. Mostly not to give a f*ck about what most people think….

Did you get a true weight?

It does look good

Originally Posted by gimp

Did you get a true weight?

It does look good

Yeah I did weigh it, bang on 26oz.

Originally Posted by Hunter_Nick

Yeah I did weigh it, bang on 26oz.

Or 737grams

Originally Posted by caberslash

Someone has been sipping, no, guzzling, the Rokslide cool aid...

How about some useful input instead of the snide little comments?

Thanks for the review, Mate...Agree with pretty much everything you said.

I've been running a 4-24 SFP (Bought from Josh) for a while now. We have been shooting and comparing it regularly against Meopta Optika 6, Sightron SIII PLR & Nightforce NX8.

https://themodernhunter.com.au/produ...-5-4-24x50-sfp

If I need another scope in the future, I'd certainly look at Maven again if they were available.

I tried to buy one of these for ages before deciding to go the Maven route - Now I see there is one available in NZ!

https://www.gunworks.co.nz/shop/item...50-scope-rs670

Is the horrific chromatic aberration (purple fringing) coming from the scope, or what you are using to take the photos?
I'd be looking elsewhere if a $2300+ scope did not have quality lenses.

Originally Posted by quentin

Is the horrific chromatic aberration (purple fringing) coming from the scope, or what you are using to take the photos?
I'd be looking elsewhere if a $2300+ scope did not have quality lenses.

yea that looks a bit suspect.

Originally Posted by Yesmate

yea that looks a bit suspect.

Photos were taken with an iPhone, which is bloody difficult to do at 15x.

The photos were primarily there to show the reticle, not the quality of the image (which is fine)